Butcher v. McClain
244 Or. App. 316
Or. Ct. App.2011Background
- Family farm owned by Betty and Edward Butcher; oral agreement in 1977 to farm jointly with Tim, sharing expenses, profits, losses, Betty/Edward to live on farm but not transfer interest; farm would become Tim's after Betty/Edward death; other property to defendants; Betty/Edward wills left farm to Tim; Tim married Rachelle and had five children; after Tim's death Betty reaffirmed farm to Rachelle and children but later eviction actions and estrangement; Betty incapacitated in 2005, power of attorney used to evict Rachelle and children via FED action; Betty executed a 2005 will disinheriting Rachelle and the children, not recorded until after her death; Betty died in 2007; plaintiffs—Rachelle and Pamela Onion (guardian ad litem for five children)—filed May 13, 2008, asserting ownership/partnership interests, interference with economic relations, reformation, and constructive trust; trial court dismissed under ORCP 21 A based on pleadings and statute of limitations issues; the appellate court reversed in part.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Accrual of interference with economic relations based on prospective inheritance | Allen extends to prospective inheritance loss; damages accrue when inheritance is lost | Accrual tied to earliest alleged interference (will execution) or eviction timing | Timely; accrual occurs at damage (death) from loss of inheritance) |
| Third-party status of defendants for interference claim | Defendants were third parties to plaintiffs' relationship with Betty | Defendants are beneficiaries of probate, not third parties | Defendants are third parties; valid interference claim potential |
| Reformation claim | Deed should be reformed to reflect partnership ownership | Pleadings insufficient to state reformation claim | Dismissal of reformation affirmed (pleadings inadequate) |
| Constructive trust claim | Constructive trust appropriate remedy for misappropriated property | Constructive trust is an equitable remedy, not standalone claim | Constructive trust claim dismissed; remedy-based only |
| Parties' status of children and guardian ad litem | Children had potential inheritance rights from Betty/Tim | Children lacked interest in partnership | Children potentially benefited from prospective inheritance; proper parties for analysis |
Key Cases Cited
- Doyle v. Oregon Bank, 94 Or.App. 230 (1988) (treats well-pleaded allegations as true on ORCP 21 A review)
- Nadeau v. Power Plant Engr. Co., 216 Or. 12 (1959) (court disregards conclusions of law)
- Allen v. Hall, 328 Or. 276 (1999) (tort of intentional interference with prospective inheritance extends economics-relations torts)
- Cramer v. Stonebridge Inn, 77 Or.App. 407 (1986) (accrual of damages when injury from interference occurs)
- Jensen v. Miller, 280 Or. 225 (1977) (elements of reformation of an instrument; pleading standards)
- Tupper v. Roan, 349 Or. 211 (2010) (constructive trust is an equitable remedy, not standalone claim)
- Doe v. Medford School Dist. 549C, 232 Or.App. 38 (2009) (declaratory judgments not proper on motions to dismiss except for justiciability)